Topic: Bell retires-style over substance? (Read 8268 times)

ppccopener · « **on:** September 06, 2020, 05:28:15 PM »

I remember as a kid going to Lords and seeing David Gower score 22 and then nick one off to the slips, instead of being deflated the most elegant batsman I had seen get out for not much, I left Lords happy I'd seen 5 perfectly timed drives that looked effortless.

Same with Bell, he never scored ugly runs and I'm def in the camp that with 22 test hundreds he was more than eye candy or made easy runs back when we had an indestructible batting line up and he came in behind KP.

Perhaps I'm just a purist at heart and like to see style.

This forums views seem very split on his contribution despite 5 Ashes wins on his CV, and a test average that puts him in the very good category.

What's your view? Can 22 hundreds be mainly soft runs? I wonder if those that don't rate him think middle order runs are easier to come by than top order ones? I can see that argument as having some weight.

What he did thou, he did with style and I for one enjoyed watching.Cheers Belly

jamielsn15 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 06, 2020, 06:37:27 PM »

Split his career in two. 2004-2009. Dropped twice, told to toughen up.
2009-2015. Scores tough hundreds in SA, Aus, India. Part of the best top 5 I've seen for England. Without any one of those players, I'm certain England don't become the best test side on the world and he doesn't survive Andy Flower's reign.
You don't fluke 22 test hundreds and more times past fifty than any other English player when he stopped playing. He wasn't a great. But he was very good.
To say he scored soft runs and was carried suggests forming an early opinion and not being swayed despite later evidence to tje contrary. Elite sport is brutal and it dropped him twice in five years. After that he thrived.
Cook, KP, great. Strauss, Bell, very good

Alvaro · « **Reply #2 on:** September 06, 2020, 06:53:59 PM »

We'd take in a flash now. Players who make it look easy always get judged the hardest.

Manormanic · « **Reply #3 on:** September 06, 2020, 07:39:44 PM »

Bell was not an all time great - there is a lot in the argument that he (like Matt Prior and several Aussies who got to bat at 6 and 7 in their decade or more or dominance) has a greater percentage of cheap runs in his career that most, and that he has often shown signs that his mental game is not up there with his technical one - but, and this is a massive BUT for me - you don't get 22 test hundreds without being some player. Think of some of the supreme talents who have not managed a fraction of that - Ramprakash being Exhibit A, probably B and C as well.

I'd also add that he seems to have been well liked by his team mates - not something that you expect to see in that Flower era schism ridden room - and that he was one of the most reliable catchers we've had. Softer skills maybe, but adding to an all round package who would, lets be frank, walk into the current team if he were a 24 year old now.

billyb · « **Reply #4 on:** September 06, 2020, 08:11:58 PM »

Bell wasn't as transformative as Pietersen, nor as consistent as Cook, and so probably doesn't belong at that very top, 'legend' status of England batsmen. But he absolutely belongs on the second tier of excellent England players, alongside Trott, Strauss, Vaughan... He scored 560-odd runs in one Ashes series, and that is enough for me.

He did it in style too... What a gorgeous cover drive he had!

Alvaro · « **Reply #5 on:** September 06, 2020, 08:46:24 PM »

Quote from: Manormanic on September 06, 2020, 07:39:44 PM

Bell was not an all time great - there is a lot in the argument that he (like Matt Prior and several Aussies who got to bat at 6 and 7 in their decade or more or dominance) has a greater percentage of cheap runs in his career that most, and that he has often shown signs that his mental game is not up there with his technical one - but, and this is a massive BUT for me - you don't get 22 test hundreds without being some player. Think of some of the supreme talents who have not managed a fraction of that - Ramprakash being Exhibit A, probably B and C as well.

I'd also add that he seems to have been well liked by his team mates - not something that you expect to see in that Flower era schism ridden room - and that he was one of the most reliable catchers we've had. Softer skills maybe, but adding to an all round package who would, lets be frank, walk into the current team if he were a 24 year old now.

His 2013 Ashes was as good as Cook�s in 2010/11. At 3. And that team was on the way down too.

Cook�s last 3 or 4 years in an England shirt were flaky at best.

Manormanic · « **Reply #6 on:** September 06, 2020, 08:54:54 PM »

Quote from: Alvaro on September 06, 2020, 08:46:24 PM

Cook�s last 3 or 4 years in an England shirt were flaky at best.

Thats a different discussion to be honest - because I personally think Cook is one of the more overrated players of recent times, and certainly a lucky chap indeed to have been knighted.

LEACHY48 · « **Reply #7 on:** September 06, 2020, 08:59:15 PM »

Personally, I think Ian bell is the best number 6 in the country and has been for years. I�d take him over anyone else we�ve tried at 6, bairstow, pope, buttler, root, etc etc. He was unbelievably good, not as talented as Pietersen (who I regard as the most talented English batsman of all time), but a serious player that would grind out runs when needs be, also, has a fabulous technique and watching him in white ball cricket was a treat too.

A-Swing-And-A-Miss · « **Reply #8 on:** September 06, 2020, 09:31:53 PM »

I remember when he was part of that phenomenal team in the Flower era where his only criticism was that he only scored hundreds after someone else had already done so. How we'd take that now! But he did prove towards the end of his career that he could stick in and do the hard yards when the going was tough particularly in 2013 when the team was starting to fall apart around him.

He isn't a great, but definitely hugely underrated member of some very successful teams and definitely deserves to be in the top tier of best England players.

Buzz · « **Reply #9 on:** September 07, 2020, 07:05:03 AM »

Class act, wonderful player. We were lucky to have been able to see him bat.
Anything else is conjecture.

And if you aren't sure, drink in this from yesterday.
https://twitter.com/CountyChamp/status/1302654341715812353?s=19

jamesisapayne · « **Reply #10 on:** September 07, 2020, 09:46:19 AM »

All this bull about style over substance really irks me - he's scored tough runs when needed to.

Very few have looked as easy on the eye as Bell, his cover drives are to die for. He's been a fabulous player and I'll certainly miss watching him,

SOULMAN1012 · « **Reply #11 on:** September 07, 2020, 02:27:44 PM »

Bell is up there in the top 10 highest ever test match run scorers for England and has an avg North of 40 so any criticism is frankly just stupid.

As has been said not in the class of Peterson, pointing, Kallis etc but i would say not very far behind and has been a superb player for county and country.

Bats_Entertainment · « **Reply #12 on:** September 07, 2020, 02:46:32 PM »

Some lack of substance!

Seems he's going out in Adidas gear, btw. (For those who do actually value style over substance.)

Bats_Entertainment · « **Reply #13 on:** September 07, 2020, 02:48:47 PM »

* Yes I know Hawk possibly make his bats.

jamesisapayne · « **Reply #14 on:** September 07, 2020, 03:18:20 PM »

Quote from: SOULMAN1012 on September 07, 2020, 02:27:44 PM

Bell is up there in the top 10 highest ever test match run scorers for England and has an avg North of 40 so any criticism is frankly just stupid.

As has been said not in the class of Peterson, pointing, Kallis etc but i would say not very far behind and has been a superb player for county and country.

Amen.

7k test runs with 22 centuries and over 20k first class runs. Style over substance my ass.

More like style AND substance.

Author Topic: Bell retires-style over substance? (Read 8268 times)

ppccopener

Bell retires-style over substance?

jamielsn15

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Alvaro

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Manormanic

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

billyb

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Alvaro

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Manormanic

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

LEACHY48

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

A-Swing-And-A-Miss

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Buzz

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

jamesisapayne

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

SOULMAN1012

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Bats_Entertainment

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

Bats_Entertainment

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?

jamesisapayne

Re: Bell retires-style over substance?